Bizzaroland

What week it's been. Wampanoags in Fall River and Freetown. Pocassets in an uproar. A rare Jack Healey siting. Town employees insisting "No comment". And quotes from tedious and mercifully ex-selectman Adam Bond. I felt like I was living in a little place called Bizzaroland - because what was up, was down, and what was down, was up. What was right was wrong, and what was wrong, well that was actually what was right for the economic benefit of... somebody.

So what's going on? Well, let me try to help clear some things up.

1.) Wampanoags scouting casino property in Fall River, Freetown and possibly other Southeastern Mass locales.

It's no secret that gambling expansion is once again on the table. And lets' face it, when you toss chum overboard, who shows up? Sharks. What you are currently witnessing is a feeding frenzy among sharks and bottom feeders alike to get the best bite out of the Bay State should casino legislation be passed. This happens every single time the battle heats up, but this time, with gambling cheerleaders Bob DeLeo and Therese Murray pushing hard, and gambling opponents like Sal DiMasi out of the way, the fish are particularly whipped up.

The Mashpee know they're not going to get a casino in Middleboro, so they're looking for greener, less federally frowned upon pastures, or as Cedric Cromwell might say, "conducting due diligence". And so, they are welcome to abandon their quest to "come home" to Middleboro and "come home" to somewhere else they've never been, and once there, to file another application and go through the process again.

They are also free to buy land and vie to purchase a license, if one were to become available, for a commercial casino. Which the Governor may let them have - if he hated the people of Massachusetts. The Mashpee tribal leadership hasn't demonstrated that they could lead a marching band, let alone their 1,500 member tribe, not to mention a separate sovereign nation harboring potentially one of the world's largest casinos.

2.) The State Indian Affairs Commission may be 'giving' the Mashpee Tribe land for a casino.

Ain't gonna happen. First, the State, including the Indian Affairs Commission can't give the tribe land on which to conduct gambling operations. There are strict federal regulations in place controlling this sort of thing. It is a federal issue. Period. If the state ever did, for whatever perverse reason, attempt to transfer land to a tribe which then attempted to 'game' on it - it would be lawsuit a-go-go. Personally, I think the reporter went looking to the commission for a quote and found someone who wanted to seem much, much more important than he actually is.

3.) But wait, it looks like Jack Healey is involved again!

Jack, with his vast misunderstanding of both federal regulations and the concept of cost benefit, may indeed have invited a tribe or two behind closed doors. But my guess is that it's a nothing but a big fat cokinydink.

4.) Why is the Middleboro planning director is saying "no comment" in the press?

Planning Director Ruth Geoffroy has, in recent years, built her hopes and career on a Middleboro casino. Sailing with her three sheets to the wind across the Kool-Aid sea, Ruth has, perhaps, suddenly found her ship of dreams scuttled on the rocky shores of reality. She's obviously in a state of shock. Let's all give her a moment.

5.) "Mr. Bond said he believes the state will approve slot machines at the Raynham dog track and will also consider offering the track owners a commercial license if they make plans to build a casino resort in the future."

The fact is, there will likely be several gambling bills put forth this month, including those that provide for racinos only, casinos only, and a combination of both. This is no surprise. In a display of unabashed hypocrisy, many pro-casino enthusiasts, such as AFL-CIO's Bobby Haynes, and gambling industry lobbyist Clyde Barrow, have begun mysteriously seeing eye-to-eye with racetrack interests like speaker Bob Deleo. Sure slots, don't bring jobs, but that's ok with Clyde and Bobby. They just want to help that vampire get his foot in the door. That's all.

I haven't observed Mr. Bond's presence at any State gambling hearings, so I'm unclear as to why he is quoted in the Middleboro Gazette as if he has some sort of special inside knowledge. If seeking an actually knowledgeable opinion on the issue, the reporter could easily have contacted Frank Dunphy, president of CasinoFacts.org, and/or Kathleen Norbut, president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts, either or whom would have been happy to go on record. But, if accuracy is unimportant, and the issue of predatory gambling nothing but a joke to the Gazette, then by all means, do keep printing everything Mr. Bond pulls out of his butt.

And one more thing. Regarding the statement, "Mr. Bond abruptly resigned from the board last January after colleagues rebuffed his assertions that the board should try to renegotiate it's contract with the tribe in light of the resignation and later imprisonment on federal charges of former tribal council chairman Glenn Marshall." Since we're clearing up fact from fiction, let's get this straight. Mr. Bond resigned in a weird hissy fit after throwing his various Board colleagues under the bus, in an anxious attempt to deflect personal and professional liability for his part in the casino chronicles - which might have lead to possible federal charges. And should, in my opinion.

Mr. Bond has repeatedly tried to re-write his history, and now it would appear, he has help.


6.) But what about the Pocassets? Can't they build a casino on their land?

No. This is not trust land, or Indian land, or federal land. And don't forget about SCOTUS. No casino.


7.) But why do I keep hearing that work "inevitable" again?

According to Steven Smith of SRPEDD "There is an inevitability about a casino in Southeastern Massachusetts." Well, I'm sure glad Mr. Smith wasn't fighting on our side during the American revolution - or we might have been scarfing down tea and crumpets during the Superbowl last night.

The fact is, the 'inevitability' card is drawn over and over again on this issue because the other reasons to legalize it are weak. The industry relies on inflated job numbers and salaries, along with other gimmicks to dupe the public. Lobbyists harangue legislators. The truth gets lost.

A colleague of mine who sat through the Oct. legislative hearings admitted to me that, after listening to Mashpee Wampaonag chairman Cedric Cromwell's testimony, even he was unaware of all the major impediments to a Southeast tribal casino.

Other people just believe that everything they hear in the papers is the gospel truth. I know I did before this issue opened my eyes.

And that's what they count on. So don't let them get away with it. Fight ignorance with facts.

The inevitability card is drawn for one reason only - it stops the most powerful foe and scariest thing the industry knows - us.

8.) So what are the real facts?

The facts are that there is a still a SCOTUS decision preventing land in trust for Indian Tribes federally recognized after 1934 which includes both federally recognized tribes in Massachusetts, and would include the Pocassets were they to be federally recognized in the future. This decision has yet to be overturned or "fixed".

Level III gambling is still illegal in Massachusetts.

The truth is, YOU can personally help stop both a "fix" and prevent the expansion of gambling in Massachusetts with just a few minutes of your time.

More on that in a day or two.

Unfriending Obama

Mayor of Las Vegas Oscar Goodman, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D - Nevada), and Nevada republican candidate Danny Tarkanian are steaming mad and demanding an apology from President Obama for excessive Las Vegas Bashing. The bashing in question?

"When times are tough, you tighten your belts," the president said. "You don't go buying a boat when you can barely pay your mortgage. You don't blow a bunch of cash on Vegas when you're trying to save for college."

--President Obama, speaking at a New Hampshire town hall meeting yesterday

"You can't go take that trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on taxpayers' dime"

--President Obama, criticizing Wall Street excesses last February

This is probably just some misunderstanding. I'm certain that what President Obama was trying to say was, if you're going to blow your kid's college fund, or take a pleasure trip on the taxpayers dime, there is no better place to do it than beautiful and economically depressed Las Vegas, and not at your local or State sponsored casinos.

Or maybe he was trying to say that only completely irresponsible idiots blow their cash at casinos during tough economic times.

Yeah. That was probably it.

Meanwhile, completely irresponsible idiots are demanding an apology.

Selective Hearing

DeLeo said finding resources for job creation initiatives will be "difficult" and described himself as both opposed to new taxes in the budget and "open to every idea that could generate state revenue and jobs." Regarding expanding gambling legislation he plans to roll out in February or March, DeLeo said, "The debate over the destination gambling issue is not a philosophical one. It is about a fight for job creation. It is a fight to expand our tourist attractions which in turn help to drive our economy. It is a fight to get shovels planted in the ground. To win this fight, I will make sure that any gaming legislation will require the creation of permanent jobs." Gambling bills are under review by the Economic Development Committee, although DeLeo is taking the lead on crafting a single bill.

-- From Statehouse News Service Jan. 28, 2010

Didn't take long for House Speaker Robert DeLeo to hone right in on President Obama's mandate to spur job creation, twisting 'job creation' to imply that casinos would create 'permanent jobs', spur tourism, and get those darned 'shovels in the ground.'

Back away from the Kool-aid, Bob.

Ok, boys and girls, let's review:

To create 30,000 jobs casino developers would have to spend 16.7 billion in construction. The most expensive casino in the world cost $2.7 Billion to construct.

Casino Resort jobs pay less than half the Massachusetts Median Income.

83% of retailers went out of business within the first 7 years of legalized gambling in Cripple Creek Colorado.

"A study commissioned by the New York Governor concluded that 1,208 more jobs would be lost rather than gained with gambling expansion due to a change in residents spending habits."

Source: Jerry Zremski, -- Doubts Raised on Casino Job Gains” The buffalo News, 8/18/02

Primary customers of casinos live locally - they are NOT tourists - and they spend less of their money locally.

"Gamblers spend 10% less on food 25% less on clothing, and 35% less on savings."

--Professor John Kindt. University of Illinois. Diminishing Or Negating the Multiplier Effect: The Transfer of Consumer Dollars to Legalized Gambling: Should a Negative Socio-Economic "Crime Multiplier" Be Included in Gambling Cost/ Benefit Analyses? 2003 Mich. ST DCL L. Rev. 281-313

78% of Local Businesses have shut down in Atlantic City since the opening of the first Casino.

"The prosecutor in Ohio and Dearborn County also warns that the economic development that was promised with the casinos has never really happened in that community and very little money is generated outside of the casino. That seems to be a similar issue with prosecutors in other communities as well."

--Indiana State Prosecutor Karen Richards
In a letter to the Mayor of Fort Wayne
describing her conversations with prosecutors in casino communities

"The local money will be diverted from the normal business purchases to the casino for everything from restaurants, refrigerators, automobiles, mortgages, and even college educations."

--Nicholas Mullane
First selectman of the town of North Stonington, Connecticut before, during and after the building of Foxwoods Casino.

Because the areas could not support the low wage jobs the casino was looking to fill in Connecticut, it brought in workers that would work for minimum wage.

-- Source: “Mayor: Casino Costly”: Sun Journal. Lewiston ME 10.22.08. By Leslie Dixon

“We were very disappointed in the economic spin-off. It just hasn’t come…When you bring in a development like [Casinos] it’s all about the money.”

-Mayor Susie Mendenhall-Ledyard County CT

According to the National Compensation Survey, Casino Resort employees make a Median annual salary of only $13,179, less than half the Massachusetts median income.

“… People were looking for jobs that paid the type of wage they had been making in the past,… but they realized those were not the jobs at the casino.”

-Grace Horne former employee in hiring department at Mohegan Sun

And those are just a few of the non-philosophical reasons legislators should stop promoting casinos - for the good of our Commonwealth.

Let's face it, Bob, you're latching onto the 'job' bandwagon to advance your private agenda of expanding gambling in the Bay State because you represent a racetrack district.

So tell me, despite all the non-philosophical evidence to the contrary, have you learned nothing from the lesson of Scott Brown? Enough with the special interests. Listen to the people, Bob. The people.

33%:support resort casinos
3%:support slots at tracks
16%:no pref
38%:don't want expanded gambling in the state at all

-- Source: Boston Globe

Art Imitates Blog

Thanks to the technological wizardry of the DVR, I was able to catch an episode of CSI: NY that I had inexplicably missed when it aired originally. Inexplicably because the entire episode revolved around an obscure but federally recognized East Coast Native American tribe, questionable Land into Trust acquisitions, and a little subject I just happened to bring to your attention two years ago on this very blog - sovereign nation internet gambling server farms.

Server farms, unlike mega resort casinos, I pointed out, can rake in millions of dollars in the space of a small warehouse. And, thanks to their tiny footprint and austere requirements, nary a tree needs to fall, nor an endangered species be pushed closer to oblivion in order to accommodate them.

Of course, the Mashpee Wampanoag tribal leadership inexplicably continues to pursue an edifice to greed, in a town they don't live in, despite an economic downturn, a Supreme Court decision, and common sense. No, they want the stained glass waterfall. They want to meet Bobby Flay and Emeril Lagasse and show up at conventions wearing expensive nouveau tribal haute couture, comparing casino sizes with the other tribes. "Ha Ha! Mine's bigger than yours!"

And they're not going to let a little addiction, crime and environmental devastation stand in their way.

But back to CSI: NY... upon discovering the server farm on a sliver of sovereign property, one member of the CIS team wonders out loud why their chairman, who "was all about preserving the integrity of his tribe" would engage in gambling operations.

The ensuing gag-inducing response, uttered by an actor playing an African American doctor no less, was as follows.

Yeah, but why not? Even if running gambling operations were hard for him to swallow at first, in this day and age, it can go a long way in promoting pride, especially prosperity, for all kinds of Native Americans.

Jeekers. I don't even know where to start with this.

Hard to swallow? As in, 'yeah, so what, you have principles, now get over it, there's big money involved!'

In this day and age? Meaning, 'in this age of titanic ponzi schemes, wall street avarice and predatory mortgage lending, are values really all that important anymore?'

All kinds of Native Americans? What, like fat ones? Skinny ones? Real ones? Fake ones?

And, in light of the fact that some TV writer thought these words were best uttered by an African American, I'm trying to imagine what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. would say, had the U.S. government said to him, "hey doc, instead of all this marching and peaceful demonstrating and content of your character stuff, why don't all you black folks move onto this big stretch of land, we'll call it a 'reservation' for lack of a better term, and that can be your country, and the rest of it will be our country, and you can have casinos to give you pride and prosperity, and that will make us all equal and we can pretend that whole slavery thing never happened. Whaddaya say??"

Hey, speaking of the U.S. government, here's something I bet you don't know. The United States once had a Native American vice president.

Yup, it's true. From 1929 to 1933, Charles Curtis served as vice president to Herbert Hoover. Curtis, who spent his childhood on a reservation, went on to serve several terms as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and also in the Senate, including terms as both Senate Majority Leader and Whip. Time magazine featured him on it's December 1926 cover. Curtis, who is noted for proposing the first version of the Equal Rights Amendment, left office just in time not only for the depths of the Great Depression, but also for the Indian Reorganization Act.

And there's never been another Native American VP since.

But then, why reach for the stars, when all that glitters, is gold?

The People's Seat

Congratulations to Massachusetts Senator-Elect Scott Brown, one of the few republicans I've ever voted for. In the coming years I hope he will stay true to his words and be the Independent voice of the people.

Even before the casino debacle I'd become increasingly disillusioned by political candidates of both parties. Despite the fact that our State and nation are becoming more moderate, politics continue to grow more partisan.

I'm pleased to note that my town of Bridgewater (a college town at that) voted for Brown 68% to 31%. Middleboro, 70% to 30%.

In fact, the same region of the State that was taken to hell in a hand basket by casino interests, intimidated by unions, gaveled to silence by their elected leaders, and mostly ignored by their their state and local reps went for Brown in a big way.

I hope that this message isn't lost on those leaders who put racetracks, casino lobbyists and other special interests ahead of the people they represent.

This tribe has spoken.

VoteShock

Long time readers of this blog know that I'm both a democrat and a feminist, and that I'd love nothing more than to help elect a democratic woman candidate as our next senator. But long time readers will also recall that I've sometimes voted my conscience rather than the ticket.

Yesterday, my husband told me that I was really an independent. "No." I replied. "I'm a democrat. I believe in what our party stands for... I just wish they'd send us better democrats."

Last year I had the long awaited pleasure of voting for a better democrat when I colored in the circle next to Alan Khazie's name. He was a candidate with what, to me, are values truer to what our party stands for. Khazie, it should be noted, is supporting Martha Coakley in the special election.

The truth is, I know some wonderful fellow democrats, holding signs on sidewalks for hours in the cold, making call after call after call to strangers, in support Martha Coakley, and I truly respect them for it - and hope they will likewise respect my decision not to.

From what I understand, I'm in good company. The fact that Ted Kennedy's seat (I mean 'the people's seat') might go to a republican has left many in shock. It shouldn't. Ted had a good run.

I'd been voting for Ted Kennedy as long as I can remember. But, in early 2007, upon learning that the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe along with a self-purposed cast of international billionaires, indian gaming lawyers, lobbyists, legislators and autocratic yokels were attempting to foist the world's biggest casino on my part of the world I wrote to both senators Kennedy and Kerry about my concerns.

Kennedy's office responded by thanking me for my interest in immigration reform. Kerry's office never responded at all.

Now, this wasn't some dog complaint or random rage against the machine that I'd penned. It was a legitimate, heartfelt letter from a long-time resident of Massachusetts, expressing my fears of a sovereign nation with a daily revolving population the size of Plymouth on 500 some-odd acres just a few minutes from my front door, and of being steamrolled by a system that had been conceived and constructed by the very political body to which they belonged.

I have no idea how either Martha Coakley or Scott Brown feel about expanded gambling in the Bay State - an issue I've come to use as my criteria in judging a candidate's intelligence, character and leadership potential because I am so intimately familiar with it - because despite being repeatedly asked, neither candidate felt the public needed to know where they stood on it.

But I'm supposed to vote for Martha because she will vote for Obama's health care bill. The thing is, I don't want to vote for Obama's health care bill. I want Obama's health care bill to go back to the drawing board. I want Obama's health care bill not to give the State of Nebraska almost as many rights as a federally recognized Indian tribe. And I don't want Obama's health care legislation to be pushed through faster than a tribal casino on an unsuspecting public.

I've heard that making legislation can be like making sausage. But from my experience, when legislation is rushed through, it comes out sort of like Swiss cheese - it has a lot of holes. Holes which will invariably be stumbled upon, then manipulated by, lawyers and various corporate interests whose main concern is decidedly not the better good of the American people.

I also realize that there's supposed to be 'a window' of time that Obama can realistically push through any health care plan, and that he's trying his best to do it, even if it means that the plan might not be the best effort. But I don't believe it. I believe that universal health care is here to stay and that refining and retooling it won't kill it for good. And I'm not alone.

And that's why the Kennedys and an onslaught of other big-name democratic paratroopers are currently falling out of the sky to remind Massachusetts voters how we're supposed to vote.

And it's worked. I'm reminded that I'm supposed to vote for a senator who will vote for legislation that is being rushed through and that when I, or someone I love is negatively effected by it, I can expect a letter thanking me for my interest in immigration reform. If I get one at all.

Listen, I'm not a Scott Brown fan. I think he's probably as big a doofus as Tim Cahill.

But I'm not a Martha Coakley fan either. Once again, a female democratic candidate has me wondering if we were even born on the same planet.

When I hear her tell us she 'stands up..' for people, I can't help but visualize a thought bubble above her head that says - '...at least when it works for me.'

I'm also weary of democratic hypocrites who paint republicans as war mongers while they, themselves, proclaim victims of state-sponsored gambling addiction and their families as 'acceptable losses'.

I'm tired of democratic leadership like that of Therese "Ka-Ching" Murray who has stated that she doesn't even read anything predatory gambling opponents send her.

I'm tired of the Kennedy family mythos deciding elections for us every time things might not go the way they want it. Like Ted, they've all had a good long run in this State, not to mention this entire nation. And, while I appreciate the Kennedy family's unrivaled sacrifices and contributions to public service, frankly, their emotionally-tinged support for the current democratic place-holder, without regard for her record, just continues to perpetuate the unhelpful, out-dated fiction that the democratic party always support the 'little guy'.

And I really would prefer that Obama stay in DC to celebrate his wife's birthday and concentrate on helping Haiti and our troops in Iraq of Afghanistan instead of coming here to Massachusetts to tell us how to vote. I like President Obama but let's face it, he wouldn't actually care so much about how we voted in this election unless his health care plan weren't threatened. He doesn't want to have to send that plan through again.

But the President forgets - this vote isn't a national referendum on health care - it's about whose voice will define the future of Massachusetts. And, we already have one of the best state-run universal health plans in the nation. In fact, the president's current plan will cost us all extra in this state because of it. And way more than it will cost the state of Nebraska which, in the true spirit of equality, will pay nothing. But pay no attention to that feeling of disparity you're having, because the democratic party will take care of you.

Incessant television ads may paint Scott Brown as a health care blue meaney, but he's said he's not against universal health care. He just wants to bring it back to the table.

If elected, I believe that a Massachusetts republican Senator will be forced to stay on his toes, while a member of the tired and true democratic machine will continue to bask in the comfort of a complacent electorate and toe the party line.

In the absence of a political miracle, a republican shake up could be the best thing that could happen to my party. It might actually save it from it's own machinery, it's own assembly line, it's own unwittingly manufactured obsolescence.

And, of the two of candidates, Brown strikes me as more likely to listen to my concerns.

That ability to listen - that rare trait, the lack of which many in my party share with the American Auto and Lending Industries

And, as long as we keep voting for them, because we're supposed to, because they know what's best for us, they'll continue in that fine tradition. Just like the Auto and Lending Industries did. And, ultimately be will good for America. Right?

When it comes down to a race between two candidates you don't like, and neither of whom probably care about what's important to you, it's going to come down to making a statement. In the past, that statement, for me, has included voting for candidates with no possibility of winning. But, this time around, I find myself with an alternative.

Despite the arguments of my friends who are supporting Coakley, I don't necessarily think that a vote for her, because she is a democrat, is automatically superior to a vote for a republican. Especially since it offers us the opportunity, at last, to send the Massachusetts democratic party a message: Send better democrats.

If Martha is elected, she could screw up royally and still stay elected for life. If Scott screws up, he'll be a one-term senator and the Massachusetts democratic party might actually be forced to care about your next senatorial vote. Wouldn't that be something?

I mean, how long is our state going to be dismissed as an impenetrable blue blob on the map? Can't we protect a woman's right to choose and have better health care legislation?

The insiders suggest Coakley will squeak out a victory, which will no doubt then be touted as a victory for the democratic party - the party of the little guy.

Nevertheless, on Tuesday, this little guy will be voting for the candidate most likely not to push her to the sidewalk should she have the audacity to ask them a question they don't want to answer.

Thank You Falettinme Be Mice Elf Agin

Yesterday, I wasn't feeling very good. So I took a sick day.

Now, when you're a mom, you can be sure that a sick day means that you still have to make breakfasts and lunches and dinners, do the dishes, pick up the kids from after-school activities and help with homework. But other than that, I took a 'sick day'.

Now, normally, when I take a 'sick day', I would be obsessing over all the work I wasn't getting done or should be doing or responding to my e-mails and making lists or coming up with storyboards or manipulating graphics , and wondering what was going on in the world. So, essentially this would still qualify as a 'work day', just with more guilt.

But yesterday was a little different. I refused to obsess. Instead, I rested. And, around 2:00 yesterday afternoon, the strangest feeling came over me. It was quite an unusual feeling and therefore took me awhile to identify.

Peace.

I felt 'at peace'. It's true. And then I realized why I felt 'at peace'.

I felt 'at peace' because at that moment, I was 100% positive that there were other people out there, good, smart, hard-working people, the other members on my team, getting things done.

In other words, I felt 'at peace' because I wasn't 'needed'.

Now, I realize that the majority of the human race enjoys, to some extent, being 'needed', at home or at work or in the community at large. It's natural, I suppose, since being needed affirms one's relevance, one's importance in the world.

But, it's not like I'm in any danger of irrelevance. When your presence is apparently crucial in pointing out when the garbage smells, or when a head of hair needs washing, or that a project is due tomorrow, or that someone needs a hug or lunch or dinner or that we're out of toilet paper... you'd be hard pressed to not to feel pretty important.

But yesterday I was on Cinderella liberty from the war on slots. And it was OK. Because everything was getting done. And done well. Probably more than I could even imagine, too. I knew that, somewhere out there, calls were being made, meetings arranged, letters written, strategy formulated... things. Stuff. Out there, people were remaining motivated and immune to the forces of inevitability with absolutely no input from me.

And I can't tell you how good that felt. I haven't felt that way in a very long time. I've not only felt 'needed' every second of the day, I've felt 'overwhelmed' beyond the point of emotional exhaustion over this cause.

The work, the worry, the indignation - it never goes away. Not for a moment. It invades your sleep. It comes with you on vacation. It speaks to you when you're at the movies and or trying to read a book. And always, you feel like you should be doing something to make it go away.

Earlier this year I was out collecting signatures a few days before surgery. Before that it was an early morning direct action event. A couple of weeks later I was driving two hours each way and an hour in between for a traffic simulation. After that it was the Democratic convention. In between were other events, the ever present blog and my sad attempts to have a life. And I did it because I felt I had to. Someone had to. If someone doesn't do these things, they can't get done.

After the July 2007 Town Meeting From Hell, a lot of people who had been up to then, really, actively fighting did something that was referred to as 'stepping back'. No one could fault them, they'd done a tremendous amount of work in a very short time.

These weren't professional organizers but homeowners, parents, just your average concerned citizens. It was an emotionally wrenching time for many people - so naturally they needed some time to rest and regroup. But the thing is, most of those people never 'stepped back in'. Despite some bright bursts of activity here and there in the ensuing years, I've watched that original momentum, that incredible heartbeat, slow to faint pulse.

Until now. Now I could take an actual 'sick day' because I'm part of this great team - not a big team to be sure - but a great one. And that's the thing about being on a team. You're not out there by yourself, being chased by 300 lb. linebackers, just trying to get the ball to the other side of the field without being killed. You're playing to win. There's someone there to catch the ball when you pass it.

Because it really sucks when there isn't.

I met this guy last year at the CERA conference and was telling him how much I admired the work his organization was doing, and I'll never forget what he told me.

"When it started out, there were a lot of other people doing this with me," he said, "but one by one, they dropped out or didn't do anything, and after awhile it was just me. And that was just as well I guess..." Then he rolled his eyes.

And I finished his sentence, "...because you know you can count on you, right?"

"Yeah." he said, smiling. "Yeah."

This guy had become pretty much an anti-casino army of one in his part of the world. He'd almost single-handedly done what some think is the unthinkable - prevented a tribal casino from being built.

I've been luckier than him, though, because I've never been completely alone on the field. There have been a brave, passionate, stubborn few who who show up, who speak out, who volunteer, who are always doing things on their own, and trying mostly in vain to motivate others to do the same. I'd be lost without those few folks and I want them to know that.

And that's the thing about being an activist, I suppose. You're either on a football team or you're a long distance runner. And frankly, having worked the Boston Marathon and seen runners collapse at the finish line, I'd rather take my chances with the linebackers. At least you know your team is still playing as you're being taken off the field in a stretcher.

The other day I was at a party for some nice people I'd met way back in the beginning of the casino debacle. In fact, the house was filled with faces I remembered so fondly from those early days, though some I hadn't seen in years. Why hadn't I seen them? I wondered, not without a touch of resentment. Don't they want to stop casinos, too?

Later, I wondered if some of them hadn't once felt about some of my colleagues and I, as today I feel about USS-Mass.

"At peace".

At peace, and grateful, because because they knew someone was still there fighting, getting things done, and because they were exhausted and overwhelmed and sick and they just needed to 'step back'.

And if that's so, I want them to know that there's never been a better time to 'step back in'.

USS-Mass is a fantastic team, with inspired leadership, making real, viable, headway in this battle. And because right now there are people on Beacon Hill with maps and thumbtacks trying to figure out where to put casinos and how many. And because a conga line of lobbyists is making it's way through the State House at this very moment. Because State Senator Stan Rosenberg, the 'point-man' on casinos drinks Kool-aid and thinks a 6% addiction rate is a small price to pay. And because pro-casino-yet-anti-circumcision champion Michael Morrissey sits on the Economic Development and Emerging Technologies Committee. Because the current Speaker confuses Attleboro with Rhode Island, and because the Senate President has privately admitted that she doesn't read anything predatory-gambling opponents send her. And because the smell of slots will brings out the greed in some people and in some Indian tribes, too... And in investors and flying monkeys and Indian gaming attorneys and inept small town leadership, and we all know where that leads.

Like I've said, the work, the worry, the indignation - it never goes away. So write a letter to the editor today. Write or call your legislator tomorrow. Send a check. Volunteer. Show up. Hold a sign. Stick a bumper sticker on your car. There are so many ways to help and to be part of this team.

Will it be a winning team? I honestly don't know. But I do know that with you there, our chances just got better.

Stan Rosenberg Thinks of Nothing But Casinos All Day

After reading "Inside Man: An interview with Stan Rosenberg, the State House’s casino expert," I had to double check that the article was actually published in the Globe, and not in The Onion.

Observe:

Among the lawmakers who will be deciding the issue, no one knows more about this side of gambling than state Senator Stan Rosenberg. For the past two years, the Democrat from Amherst has been the Senate’s gambling guru, traveling to casinos in Nevada, Louisiana, New Jersey, Connecticut, New York, Iowa, and Canada to study the industry from the inside.

He has spent time with casino developers and money changers, walking windowless rooms full of noisy slot machines in an effort to understand what casinos would mean to Massachusetts - and how the state should handle them.

Ok, so... Rosenberg's been to a lot of casinos and spent some quality time with gambling industry insiders. Oooookaaay... That's nice. But the article fails to mention whether Rosenberg has spent any time listening to predatory gambling opponents. Which I don't think he has, since I would have heard about it. And, in my book, you can't really go around considering yourself a casino 'expert' if you've only studied them from the inside.

That just reminds me of those folks who frequent comment forums or message boards insisting that they've never had any problems with gambling... they've never seen any increase in crime... they've been to casinos and everything is super dee duper... bring on the promised embarrassment of riches! Recapture our god-given gambling revenue!

And I'm a little concerned about Rosenberg's taste level.

There’s waterfalls and all kinds of things. It’s a really beautiful venue, and you don’t even realize that you’re in a casino.

Um... Ok. If Stan can't tell the difference between stained glass rock formations and the real thing, maybe he needs to take some time off from the casinos and do a week or two of Outward Bound or something.

But why should you concern yourself with Stan the Casino Man and his rose-colored one-way superficial view of the gambling industry?

Well, not only is it possible that Stan will be a decision maker in upcoming expanded gambling legislation here in Massachusetts, but based on the vast empirical data he's gathered in the field, Stan thinks he knows where resort destination casinos would be best. And that might be near you.

There may be places in the Commonwealth where you could build things in the style of a Foxwoods or Mohegan Sun that don’t look out of place because they’re off on their own.

Stan's somewhat less-the-scientific assessment doesn't exactly take into account traffic or water availability or property values or environmental impacts or infrastructure improvements, and he obviously sports a misconception of what "off on their own" means, seeing as how there's not even one single solitary Massachusetts casino plan on the table that's nestled in the middle of nowhere.

But that doesn't bother Stan, because a.) he doesn't gamble (sarcasm) and b.) he knows that he's safe in Amherst, where a casino will never see the windowless artificially generated light of day.

But my favorite part of the article is when he was asked what he saw as the difference is between the lottery and casinos.

There’s nothing classy about playing the lottery. You’re buying a ticket. You may scratch it on the counter, in the car, at home....You’re just scratching and then you throw it away. You go into these gaming venues and you may see a show, go to a nice restaurant, you may walk around the mall and do your holiday shopping, and you may spend the night.

If Stan is really of the belief that 'casinos' imply 'class', I know some New Jersey housewives who'd like to make his acquaintance.

Repeat after me, Stan: Casinos are to Class as Spam is to Cuisine,

The only cache casinos can actually boast are when they're the places you can experience a private bacchanal with no lingering repercussions. 'What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas' has been the pragmatic marketing strategy keeping that city marginally afloat during the worldwide economic meltdown.

Swinging off the exit to squander a few hours playing slots (which account for 70-80% of casino revenue) is not classy. It doesn't even come close to classy. It doesn't touch classy's hem. It's classy's silicon-enhanced leopard-stretch-pants wearing tattooed third cousin, twice removed.

Oh, and that money going into restaurants and shops, Stan, that's money not going into local restaurants and local shops (aka the local economy).

I'm not really sure why Stan Rosenberg is "The State House's casino expert" except perhaps that he (insert raised eyebrow) was 'hand picked' (like a ripe pear?) by Therese Murray (insert wink) to 'study' the wonder of it all (hmmmm), so she could avoid looking like a killjoy to her friends in the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe, some of whom want to build the world's largest resort destination casino, not tucked away in the woods, but in the midst of homes, schools and businesses, and more importantly, in a town adjacent to her constituency.

But heck, you can't fault Stan for his humanity.

I have no doubt there will be more addiction, but I also am not one of those people who believes - I mean 94 percent of people can participate in slot machines without getting themselves in trouble. It’s hard for me to justify saying to 94 percent of people you can’t do what you want to do when 6 percent of the people can’t leave the machine when they’ve lost more than they should.

That's right Mr. Expert. It's that hard core six percent who support the industry. And we'll need them, won't we?

I’m not wild about gambling, but I don’t have this self-righteous attitude about gambling. My concern is that if we’re going to do it that it be a very strongly regulated system, that we address community mitigation, economic impacts, and the addiction.

Yeah, because the State does that so well now.

I don't know, folks... our man Stan may not be wild about gambling, but to hear him talk... it would appear that he does enjoy the drink.

No Soup For You!

Remember how, back in the good old days, whenever some 'issue' surfaced amongst the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe, paid spokesperson Scott Ferson would magically appear, perform the danse inévitable then slink back to his hidey hole?

Ah... good times, good times.

These days the Tribe is reduced to speaking for themselves, complete with threats and an utter denial of reality.

In yesterday's Boston Herald, Tribal Chairman Cedric Cromwell was quoted as saying,

If the governor refuses to deal with us and distributes licenses to other casino operators, we won’t give the state a cent when we build a gaming facility in Southeastern Massachusetts,”

The article failed to mention if Cromwell then put a hand on one hip, stamped his foot and stuck his chin in the air, but I suspect so.

“We know the governor is a busy man, but it’s very important for the administration to meet with us because we are a sovereign nation,” he said.

That's right, Ced, the Governor is a busy man. Just look at how long he took to meet with the expanded gambling opposition here in Massachusetts. Two and a half years.

Years, Ced.

And to accomplish that we had live through his three-casino agenda, witness the incarceration of one of your predecessors, survive a Supreme Court decision, experience an economic meltdown, extract a resolution from the Democratic party, form a new organization and wait for a shift in the political climate.

But of course he'll meet with you. Doesn't he always drop everything to talk casinos with you? He's probably met with your Tribe more often than he's met with his own staff. Frankly, I'm surprised you don't have him on speed-dial like Glenn and Sean did.

And, I mean, why wouldn't the Governor want to meet with a 1,500 member sovereign nation with a colorful reputation for corruption, political-infighting, violence, and whose members struggle, according to you Ced, with substance abuse, and whose apparent singular goal is to bring casino gambling, an industry well known for it's association with crime and addiction, to a large section of the State under the guise of economic development that even some members of your own tribe oppose.

Who wouldn't pass up an opportunity like that?

But hey, please keep threatening to leave the State out of your imaginary casino revenue as it certainly gives the Governor just one more reason not to pass slot legislation.

Oh, and don't forget, if by some unholy miracle your tribe did get a.) Carcieri fixed b.) land into trust for 'gaming' c.) a favorable EIS and d.) a quarter of a billion for infrastructure improvements, you would STILL have to negotiate a compact with the Governor. And I suspect it would not involve the State getting bupkiss for gambling revenue.

In that event, sure, I suppose you could work the court system for a few decades in an attempt to weasel out of a compact ...Which would just give this great country of ours more time to realize how truly out of control and 'inequitable' (your words, not mine) federal Indian policy is in this great big modern cultural melting pot. That works for me.

By the way, as an aside, Senator Byron Dorgan, who introduced the latest Carcieri 'fix' has just announced his intention to retire. As did Connecticut's Chris Dodd, one of the men who helped usher in the age of inevitability for tribal casinos here in New England. Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Chris.

And speaking of other 'fixes' that won't be forthcoming... The Brockton Enterprise (the same pro-casino daily which famously neglected to mention Article III from the July 2007 Middleboro Town Meeting from Hell) has gotten it wrong once again.

On the federal issue, Middleboro’s Richard Young, former president of the statewide anti-gambling group United to Stop Slots, said his group will lobby Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, a staunch opponent to tribal casinos.

For those who are unaware, Rich Young has never had any association with United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts, and should not be quoted by the media speaking for that organization.

Rich Young is the former president of CasinoFacts.org and of the now-defunct CasinoFreeMass.

Kathleen Norbut is the president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts and has been president of this organization since it's inception.

Frank Dunphy is the current president of CasinoFacts.org

Contact information for United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts is and has been clearly posted on it's web site for some time now.

USS-Mass, as many of you may know, is also the same organization which, in just the past several months has testified at the statehouse hearings on expanded gambling, met with the Mass. AG's top staff, as well as with the Mass. Secretary of Housing and Economic Development (twice), the Secretary of Health and Human Services (twice), Governor Deval Patrick, and held a large, well-publicized public Forum at Faneuil Hall featuring former governor and presidential candidate Michael Dukakis and his wife Kitty, Former AG Scott Harshbarger, Mass State Senator Sue Tucker, republican and former New Hampshire state senator Jim Rubens, and former democratic candidate for Ted Kennedy's senate seat, Alan Khazei.

And so, as you can see, it's perfectly understandable how the Enterprise reporter might have thought the group was too inactive and uninformed to be contacted.

But, for the record, I did personally alert the editor of Enterprise to the faux pas this morning (which remains uncorrected as I publish this post) but do continue to maintain complete faith that the paper will ignore the correction, repeat this and other glaring gambling-related errors, and continue to provide the public with similar exciting fiction in the future.

No Soup, one year!

Calendar Girl

In January Adam Bond resigned.
Come February 'done deals' were redefined.
So then March was all about the 'fix',
And by April it was back to their old tricks.

Yeah, yeah, sometimes it's a blur,
That's why I love, I love, I love
to see the way that we were
Every day
(Every day,)
Every day
(Every day,)
of the year!

It was back in May when Murray cried “Ka-Ching!”
But by June we'd resolved to bring back the spring.
The rain of July sprouted a new organization,
In August I barely made it through my vacation,

Yeah, yeah, isn't it great?!
That's why I love, I love, I love, I love
to keep it all straight
Every day
(Every day,)
Every day
(Every day,)
of the year!

September revealed the truth about Clyde
And as October closed we all testified,
By November the Tribe had gone on sale,
While December brought the Holy Grail...

Yeah, yeah, it's all a big fog,
That's why I love, I love, I love
my little activist blog
Every day
(Every day,)
Every day
(Every day,)
of the year!


BEST WISHES FOR ANOTHER SLOT-FREE YEAR (AND DECADE) EVERYBODY!
Love, Gladys

The Nightmare Before Christmas

Oh, the sound of rollin' dice
To me is music in the air
'Cause I'm a gamblin' Boogie Man
Although I don't play fair

It's much more fun, I must confess
When lives are on the line
Not mine, of course, but yours, old boy
Now that'd be just fine

Wow, it's like the guy who wrote this movie understood, way back in 1993, that casinos are the ultimate boogey man. (Hey, did you catch the slot machines equipped with guns?) The real nightmare is that legislators still don't get it, and want our state to partner up with the creepy gamblin' boogie man.

Coal in their stockings this year, Santa!

Santa wins, in the end, of course, and Christmas is saved, and eventually, our gambling nightmare will be over, too.

Best wishes, dearest friends and readers, for a healthy, happy, wonderful casino-free Christmas and slotless New Year.

- Gladys

Never Doubt...

Just this Monday, members of the USS-Mass coalition (including yours truly) met with Governor Patrick at the Statehouse, for over an hour, to discuss the many reasons we oppose expanding gambling in Massachusetts.

Shortly thereafter, Governor Patrick penned the following letter to casino/racino proponents Senate President Therese Murray and Speaker of the House Bob DeLeo commending our coalition's proposal for a

"fresh, independent and transparent analysis of the costs and benefits of expanded gambling."

I wish I could have seen their faces.

We've come a long way baby!

At Long Last, Deval

When you've PhotoShopped a person's face enough times, I suppose to some small extent you start to feel like you've actually met them. Which might explain why I felt completely at ease meeting, and speaking with Governor Deval Patrick, and his advisors yesterday, along with 9 other members of my coalition, United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts, as well as Palmer Citizens Impact Study Committee member Stephen Sears, Rebekah Gewirtz, director of government relations at the National Association of Social Workers, and Senator Sue Tucker (D - Andover).

But it could just be the Governor himself. He was so welcoming, easy-going and engaging that I couldn't help but remember the distance and desperation I'd felt, standing in front of the Statehouse at the end of the summer of '07, along with a collection of kids, spouses and Middleboro residents, holding signs, deflecting the flying monkeys, talking to the press, posing for pictures, and trying, more than anything, to get the Governor's attention.

Even just an article in a newspaper, or a quote that didn't land at the bottom of the page.

We protested and blogged, made videos and gathered signatures, made calls and organized forums all over the region, wrote editorials and sent him our personal letters. But the Governor, apparently, had remained unmoved, and shortly afterward filed a bill to build three casinos in Massachusetts.

So I don't know how, over two years later, we finally got this meeting with the Governor, but suspect it had to do with a lot of things that occurred in those last two years, which, in the past few months have started to come together, including:

• The research of MIT professor Natasha Schull and that of others which lead to a re-thinking of the issue as one of 'predatory gambling'
• The mega implosion of the Governor's casino plan '08
• The economy soured in a way that gave serious reflection to what we considered 'disposable income' - hitting the casino industry especially hard
• The predatory lending and casino capitalism crisis which lead to comparisons to predatory gambling
• Casinos became hard pressed to get credit for expansion
• The going price for slot licenses took a gigantic nose dive
• SCOTUS went to Carceiri effectively ending the Wampoang casino scenario
• The Massachusetts Democratic party adopted a resolution to oppose slots
• Citizens banging away on forums and list-servs raised awareness of the issue
  
• RI's Twin River, financially struggling 'gambling states' and gambling arms races around the country illustrated the fractured fairy tale that is state-sponsored gambling
• USS-Mass.org was formed with visible new leadership, energy and messaging
• Casino enthusiast and goto guru Clyde Barrows was revealed as a paid industry operative
• Senatorial candidate and CityYear co-founder Alan Khazei had the guts to speak out publicly against the issue, further raising awareness among the general public

And all of these issues, it should be pointed out, were brought forward and kept alive by citizen bloggers.

There are, no doubt, even more factors which made our meeting with the Governor a reality. Mostly, I give credit to USS-Mass President Kathleen Norbut for working that special magic she has with getting people to notice and pay attention. Earlier this fall, our group met with the Attorney General's office, Secretary of Health and Human Services JudyAnn Bigby and Secretary of Housing and Economic Development Greg Bialecki.

But yesterday was something special and it didn't just have to do with finally speaking with the Governor of Massachusetts. It was truly an honor to be among that group of citizens, with so many areas of expertise, so much passion, and representing so many perspectives, and finally bestowed with an opportunity to tell our side of the story to our State's chief executive.

Of all the people in that room, I had been there the longest, have attended everything from national conferences to Statehouse hearings to regional taskforce meetings to local forums to private discussions, and can say honestly that this was the best presentation, albeit the Readers Digest version, of the evidence and reasoning behind the opposition to expanded gambling in Massachusetts - as well as predatory gambling nationwide - that I'd ever heard. But more than anything, it was just such a relief to be able to do it.

In May of 2007 I'd never even been to a selectman's meeting before - sitting on a hard wooden folding chair, in another town, not knowing a soul, being told by "experts" that my world was about to change and that I had no power to say anything about it. That meeting turned out to be the spark, which started a fire, that on December 7th 2009 had managed to blaze all the way to the Governors office, where, under a crystal chandelier, in a posh conference room at the Statehouse, and among friends, I finally had a say.

After introductions, a few of us spoke to certain aspects of our cause, but it was the Governor himself who lead the discussion with his own thoughtful questions for us, and it was fascinating - and really pretty eye opening.

Honestly? I don't think the Governor actually knows all that much about the issue. Which is kind of scary. But at least he seems open to learning more, now. To that end, my colleague Bob Massie brought along Prof. Kindts massive three volume UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL GAMBLING REPORT SERIES to show the Govenor - who seemed astonished there was so much written on the subject. Holding up the thinnest volume, still an epic, he remarked, "this is the executive summary?" and laughed.

Bob also suggested that the Governor might want to hear from the Middleboro contingent, which consisted of Jessie Powell and myself, about what went down back in the 'good old days' before we'd become a Statewide movement.

I should probably mention that Jessie and I were completely unprepared for this. As for me, I was taking notes and juggling all sorts of facts, observations and personal insights in my head to share with the Governor should I get a chance to speak, and suddenly, I found myself leafing back to Chapter 1.

"It was kind of weird, wasn't it?" He said, before either of us had uttered a single word.

Yup, that's right, folks. The Governor asked if the going's on in Middleboro weren't a tad 'weird'.

(He's so going to love my book.)

Because as we know, dear readers, weird is only the tip of the iceberg.

It was weird, wrapped in bizarre, inside a freakshow.

Unexpectedly offered the opportunity we've been waiting years for, Jessie and I took the next few minutes describing for the governor the Middleboro Casino Massacre, complete with mental 8 by 10 glossy color photos with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one. The Governor and his staff, in my opinion, seemed especially attentive to this information.

Sadly, we didn't have enough time to get into the really good stuff.

But the Governor was still thankful. He said that, at his level, the information he gets is somewhat 'abstract', though let's face it, he had the 'weird' part right.

By the way, it seemed news to the Governor that there was another article on the ballot at the Town Meeting from Hell.

(Great job, Boston Globe. Bravo, Brockton Enterprise.)

Well, I hope Jessie and I were able to clear things up for him at least a little.

At the end of the meeting, which went especially long, the Governor expressed that he'd been particularly interested in learning what Jessie and I from the Middleboro region, and Steve and Kathleen, from the Palmer region, had to say about the fight at the local level. And I don't think he was saying that to be nice. And no one was more surprised than me.

So, friends, this is what I want you to do. I want you to strike while the iron is hot. Write to the Governor, and share your story from the casino chronicles.

Deval Patrick
Massachusetts State House
Office of the Governor
Office of the Lt. Governor
Room 280
Boston, MA 02133

Make a copy and cc: it to his aide on casino stuff Stan McGee (same address)

C'mon guys. This is your chance! Don't let it pass you by! Right the wrongs! There are over 2 years worth of documented weirdness on this blog if you need to refresh your memory. I'm writing, too, just to thank the governor for his time and interest and to fill in the gaps of what I'd shared with him earlier.

My feeling about yesterday, after all my time in the slot trenches, is that we had a good meeting with Deval Patrick - a very good meeting - but that politics has a special weirdness all it's own.

The whole thing could have been the "Big Schmooze". I wouldn't put it past the Governor, his staff, or anyone else to have scheduled this meeting, made us think we'd been productive, well treated, and effective - only to come out later and say that he'd had a very good meeting with the slot opposition, had thoughtfully considered what we had to say, and decided that casinos were a good bet anyway. In fact, I learned that move from him.

But my fingers are crossed. My heart and mind are open and I keep hoping for reasons to hope. And as always, I continue to believe that sanity will, in the end, take the day.

As the meeting finally came to a close, Kathleen invited Deval to "our party," our Case for the Commonwealth Against Slots and Casinos at Fanueil Hall this Thursday, and maybe he'll even come. But more importantly, I hope you, those of you who've been blazing this trail right along with me all this time, those of you who lived it, who never gave up, never bought into inevitability, will be. Because, believe it or not, you were all there too yesterday, sitting beside me in that hard-won meeting yesterday.

And because this long strange trip ain't over yet.

Hope to see you there!
Love, Gladys

Gladys Kravitz Officially Endorses Alan Khazei for Senate

I'm realize that I'm a political cynic.

And I do not always relish this distinction. It's not a lot of fun.

For example, I never bought a supposedly inspiring word of Deval's Together we Can, and couldn't summon so much as a glimmer of excitement over Bill Clinton's campaign - even after 47 stanzas of Can't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow.

Worse - the casino crisis even managed to kill Obama's pervasive glowing hope for me. And that looked like a lot of fun.

And frankly, despite all recent attempts to canonize Ted Kennedy, I'll always remember him as a deeply flawed man, an awkward leader, and the guy who sent a form letter thanking me for my interest in immigration reform - after I had actually been trying to alert him to the casino injustices occurring in Middleboro back in 2007.

I wasn't always a cynic. It sort of evolved over the years. Probably because I've given a lot of my votes to various democrats in my region over the years, only to watch David Flynn and Marc Pacheco vigorously champion the rights of dog track employees, while completely dismissing the concerns of slots opponents. And when I mean completely, I mean completely. Sure, they both represent a region with a racetrack, but don't they also represent families, children, local businesses?

I've also voted for a few republicans along the way - (I personally feel that always voting for the democratic candidate most likely to win, just to place a democrat in office, only results in a string of rich, lackluster democrats in office - not to mention more registered independents) but no one who stood out. No one who spoke to me, that inner cynic who, with every passing year, became more convinced that campaigns were the political equivalent of movie trailers - a quick, exiting montage of all the best bits, which invariably turns out to be a huge disappointment after you'd bought your ticket.

And so you see, it's just not exciting to be a cynic. Therefore, it is with great, and completely unexpected pleasure that I enthusiastically endorse Alan Khazei for the Senate.

It's not just the fact that he is opposed to expanded gambling in Massachusetts - though that certainly got my attention. And it's not just that he puts money where his mouth is on this often controversial issue, and takes every opportunity to speak about it - though that's what convinced me to meet with him.

It's that Alan Khazei is the real thing.

When my group, United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts met with him, it was because he'd asked us to do it. Pretty unusual for a busy guy trying to win an election, don't you think? Still, I figured it must be so he could hit us up for a donation or something. (See what I mean about being a cynic?) But since I don't have any money, I knew I was safe. Besides, I did want to meet and thank the man for his public opposition to a cause I've been intimately involved with for the last two and a half years.

And it wasn't as if Khazei didn't sound like a good candidate. He'd co-founded CityYear - an idea I'd always considered both creative and pioneering, and by doing so he'd helped a lot of people, help themselves, while helping the people of the city of Boston. Most politicians - they're always busy robbing Peter to pay Paul. But Khazei convinced Pete to give Paul a job, so he pay him back on his own. And I like that.

I'd been to Khazei's web site, found I agreed with him on the issues, and discovered he's fond of using the same two famous quotes chosen by a couple of bloggers I've come to admire very much in the past few years during the casino fight.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

and

Be the change you want to see in the world. - Mahatma Gandhi

But as far as I knew, Khazei was still the vast underdog. The guy whose name I couldn't stop confusing with Hamid Karzai. The guy without any good commercials and who looked kind of like he must have been president of the AV club back in high school.

And then I met him. Oddly, he didn't ask for a donation, and didn't even talk about his campaign. He was there, he said, to ask how he could help us. Khazei then engaged us in a breathless conversation about his long background as a citizen activist and organizer, then offered our group a great deal of both extraordinary encouragement and advice.

His advisers were anxious to move him along to his next appointment, but Alan wouldn't budge. He believed in the power of citizen activism, had lived it most of his life, and had seen how it could make a difference, and he wanted us to know it too. He wanted us to know we could win.

And that's what finally spoke to me. Because I believed in it too, had lived it too, and have seen, first hand, how it can make a difference - even in the comparative microcosm of time that I've also been a citizen activist. And I wouldn't still be here if I didn't think we could win.

Before Alan left he did something truly unexpected. Pointing to us each individually, he called us 'heroes' for what we were doing. And to be honest, I appreciated this as much for myself as for everyone else in that room.

Because it sucks to fight slots and casinos. Our cause isn't even on the radar for a lot of people. Most people don't understand the ramifications of expanded gambling. And to some, our cause is actually the enemy, depriving citizens of our state jobs, revenue and their own little slice of Vegas.

And, when our side wins one, our reward isn't in finding a cure or funding research or holding back the tide. When our side wins, there's no one to say 'thanks' when they, or someone they love, never becomes an addict, or loses business, or when their well runs dry both literally and figuratively. No one will be there to appreciate the children not neglected or abandoned, the families not broken or stressed, the communities not depleted, the crimes not committed, the homes not foreclosed, bankruptcies not filed, and the occasional life lost.

But Alan Khazei gets it, because this is a guy who believes in making lives better without making other lives worse.

Though all of the Democratic candidates claim to be the rightful heir and follow in the footsteps of Ted Kennedy - I believe that the flawed, awkward, and recently canonized Ted Kennedy, who was often photographed wearing a red City Year jacket, would have liked very much to have followed in the footsteps of an Alan Khazei.

All the other democratic candidates no doubt possess qualities that would make good candidates for the senate, but none of them would, in my opinion, make for a great candidate.

My first instinct as a feminist was to vote for Martha Coakely. But, thanks to the predatory gambling issue, I've seen her in a new light. She sends me big glossy campaign literature claiming to protect the public against predatory lenders. Well, that's nice, after the fact. How about protecting the public, in advance, by having your office, the State's number one consumer advocate, launch an investigation into predatory slot machines, designed using ergonomic and neurotechnology likely to cause addiction? She also likes to say she'll stand up for us. Yeah, right. She won't even stand up to her biggest supporter Therese Murray! Hey, sisters gotta stick together, but that's not the way.

Then, I started falling for the hypnotic world of Steve Pagliuca's commercials - it was like getting a tour of Wonka World - you could have everything! That is - until I wrote him a nice letter asking him about his stance on expanded gambling and he never wrote me back. But, that didn't stop him from making more Willy Wonka commercials. Apparently, he is not only the rightful heir to Ted Kennedy - he will be the protector of children, the bestest consumer advocate ever, and the jobs senator.

Honestly, I believe that if the polls showed that the public was for space colonies on Mars, the next day Steve Pagliuca would have ads on every network proclaiming to be the space-colonies-on-Mars senator.

Meanwhile, in reality, if Pagliuca truly protected children he'd be vocally opposed to predatory slot machines like his predecessor on the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. If he were truly a consumer advocate he'd be turning an inquisitive eye toward slot machines, and, if he really cared about jobs, he wouldn't own and operate Bain Capital which

has a history of buying up profitable businesses, slashing workforce, research and development, and making a giant profit off of those businesses regardless of whether they do well or not, because they sell those companies in the short term. Because of the short-term focus of Bain's business, there's actually a financial incentive for people like Pagliuca to set up these companies to fail. Many of those companies not only do decidedly worse after being accosted by Bain, with many fewer jobs, but they get saddled with the debt Bain used to buy them in the first place. That's right: Bain doesn't always pay for their takeovers, they make the companies they take over pay for it. Only in America.

And finally, if Steve Pagliuca has enough moola to consume the airwaves with his ads, he has enough moola to hire an aide to respond to letters from voters who take an hour and a half out of their day to write him a long letter. If this is the kind of response we can expect from the next senator from Massachusetts, I'll pass.

Capuano. As with Khazei, I'll give him props for responding to United to Stop Slots questionnaire. And he's done a lot of good things and I agree with him on many issues. But to be honest, he gives me a bad vibe, the kind I've felt before. To me he came across as combative and disrespectful. Turns out that my vibe was justified, as I watched him weirdly tear into Pagliuca over a woman's right to choose at this week's debate. A few days later, a colleague from Somerville - where Capuano was once Mayor - revealed how Capuano had taken a somewhat vindictive hissy fit after being snubbed at the 1992 Democratic convention, maintains bitter grudges and once dissed him in front of his young daughter for not backing him up in a 1998 election.

Hey, I personally think it's good to be passionate, but having experienced my own fair share of In-Your-Face 'persuasion' from others over the casino issue, I can tell you that this personality style is only effective when you're trying to scare people, not trying bring them together, and has no place in one of our highest elected offices.

He's also missed over 33% of the votes in Congress this year. One third!

Meanwhile, back in Massachusetts, despite the glossy ads, recorded phone messages and oppressive political TV commercials, I've watched the 'vast underdog' convince a lot of other people that he's the right guy for the job too. Like the Boston Globe:

In supporting Khazei, the Globe believes that this state’s future depends on new ideas. The next Massachusetts senator should be the person who best embodies forward-looking thinking, and not the traditional paths to power.

And Blue Mass Group, one of the most politically relevant opinion and discussion forums in the State, which even cites Khazei's stance on expanded gambling:

Another clear distinction between Khazei and the other three candidates is the issue of casinos: Khazei is unequivocally opposed to bringing casino gambling to Massachusetts, while the other three are for it (with varying degrees of enthusiasm). Strictly speaking, whether or not MA legalizes casino gambling is not a federal issue (though there are federal aspects that our next Senator could face, such as the question whether Congress will revise the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 in light of this year's Supreme Court decision that made it much harder for the federal government to take land into trust -- the necessary precursor to building a tribal casino in Middleborough). But a Senate seat comes with a big bully pulpit, and we have no doubt that Khazei would use it (as he is already doing). Your three editors are not entirely in agreement on the casino issue, but two of us support Khazei's stand and appreciate his willingness to speak out about it, and the third is grateful for a candidate who at least has a coherent position.

Jonathon Alter, in Newsweek:

"Building the world's best education system is no longer just a moral imperative because our children deserve it," Khazei said in a well-informed speech last month. "It is the key to our economic recovery and the backbone of our international security."

Former General Wesley Clark:

At this critical time, we need more patriots and public servants like Alan Khazei representing the people’s interests in Washington.

When it comes to foreign affairs, Alan Khazei is one candidate who won’t need on the job training. Alan has met with leaders in over thirty countries, has a curious mind, a multi-cultural perspective, is a student of history and understands the complexities of national security in the 21st Century.

Senator Sam Nunn:

"Your proven ability to accomplish significant legislative results as a private citizen indicate to me that you would be successful in the United States Senate and would have the potential to become one of the Senate’s most effective leaders."

Ted Kennedy's widow Vicki Strauss Kennedy:

Alan will bring the same wisdom, passion and fresh approach to the hard work of creating jobs, ending the war, protecting our planet and resources, improving schools, and addressing the health care needs of our citizens. Alan has the experience to bring people and our representatives in Washington together around the essential issues we care about deeply. He has done so again and again with remarkable success.

Perhaps most important, Alan has a joyful, dedicated energy that is unwavering. No one works harder or cares more. His indomitable spirit and deep appreciation of possibility would make him a most indefatigable advocate for Massachusetts in the years ahead. Please join me in supporting his candidacy for U.S. Senate on December 8th.

My friend, most excellent fellow blogger, and colleague Ryan Adams:

Furthermore, Alan Khazei's willingness to get into issues on the stump that aren't directly related to the campaign show he's willing to stick up for what he thinks is right, regardless of the political consequences. In a country where politicians have become so vanilla and risk adverse, it's a particularly refreshing political trait.

And earlier today, the Cape Cod Times:

...Khazei is polished and articulate, draws his opinions from a host of experts and isn't afraid to take a position outside the populist point of view.

On local matters, we were not impressed by most of the candidates' knowledge of Cape and Islands' issues — except Khazei, who supported regionalization efforts here and ways to strengthen the tourist economy. The other candidates could not fully articulate even one local issue of consequence, and there are many from which to choose. It's not the only reason Cape residents should vote for a candidate, but they should feel comfortable in the belief that their interests will be represented not only globally but also locally.

Alan Khazei's name is on the first lawn sign I've ever sunk into the ground for a candidate for political office, and while I realize that my endorsement is no big deal in light of the others he's received, that makes it kind of a big deal for me.

Khazie would make an exceptional senator, from an exceptional state. And, more than just being a 'qualified' predecessor to Ted Kennedy, that is what our State really needs and deserves.

Thanks to the casino debate, I've become keenly aware of the low expectations so many people, including legislators, have for our great state. I've watched how easy it is for other people to fall for them, to think a situation is inevitable or that there is no other way. But Khazei is all about the win-win, the creative solution. He's about harnessing the power of the little guy. He's fought, and won, in Washington before. And he did it without getting in anyone's face, major name recognition, or a slew of expensive commercials.

And he did something I never thought would happen again in my lifetime - he's gotten me excited to vote. This Tuesday I'm going to go into the voting booth, pick up that sharpie and color in the little circle next to Khazei's name, not in resignation, not in false hope, and not in exasperation. I'm going to fill it in because I actually believe in the candidate and his potential.

I therefore officially, and un-cynically, endorse Alan Khazei for the U.S. Senate, and strongly urge my Democratic and Independent friends to vote for him in Tuesday's primary election. (Especially those of us who are painfully aware of how important it is for us that a U.S. senator grasp the differences between a Carieri fix and immigration reform.)

Like I've said, my endorsement doesn't mean much, and it's coming way too late, but, as always, I've been kind of busy fighting in the war on slots. And I think Alan would understand.

One of his commercials came on last week - it featured little babies, a stinky diaper and how he was going to clean up the mess in Washington. And it made my ten year old son laugh out loud. Seizing an opportunity to look good to my kids, I said, "Hey, that guy called your mom a hero."

"You're my hero, Mom," my son replied without missing a beat

And that kind of endorsement, my friends, is the best endorsement any citizen activist could ever want or need.

Obama Just Says "No"

Well, this is a step in the right direction...

Associated Press - Dec. 4, 2009

ALLENTOWN, Pa. — Here's one job-creating strategy President Barack Obama isn't considering.

Obama just said no to a suggestion from a Pennsylvania college student that he consider legalizing nonviolent crimes, including gambling and drugs, to stimulate the economy and create jobs.

Obama told the student at a forum in Allentown, Pa., on Friday that he appreciated the "boldness" of the idea. And he said the young man was doing just what college students are supposed to do — questioning conventional wisdom.

But he says the student's suggestion is not one he's going to follow.

Hey, notice the student included "drugs" and "gambling" in the same sentence? How's that for an endorsement. Hugs, not drugs, dude...